The Supreme Court has declined to hear an appeal by BN Kotecha & Sons, dealing a blow to the Kisumu based sugar dealer.
The dealer wanted the apex court to hear its appeal in a fight with Amalo & Company ltd over the supply of goods worth Sh260 million.
But the Supreme Court dismissed the application saying it does not have the jurisdiction to determine the case. In 2019, the High Court entered an ex parte judgment against BN Kotecha & Sons, after the firm failed to enter appearance.
The sugar dealer later moved to the appellate court arguing that they were condemned unheard but the same was dismissed by a three judge bench forcing the firm to escalate the dispute to the Supreme Court.
Court maintained that the appellants were not condemned unheard, but were heard on their application that was seeking to set aside the default judgment, which application was determined on merit.
Supreme Court judges led by Chief Justice Martha Koome, Mohamed Ibrahim, Smokin Wanjala, Njoki Ndungu and William Ouko said the appeal did not involve the application or interpretation of the constitution.
“We cannot delve into the application for the conservatory orders staying the execution of the judgement by the court of appeal as sought by the petitioners in their notice of motion,” ruled Supreme Court The B.N. Kotecha & son’s and Hemal Kotecha had pleaded with the Apex court to suspend court of appeal decision pending hearing and determination of the application.
Kotecha contended that that their application met threshold for the court to grant conservatory orders staying the appellate court decision.
The firm also sought to vary an order directing them to deposit security of Sh20 million, explaining that despite the efforts that they have made, they have not been able to raise the amount.
The firm said its finances were tied up in loans advanced to third parties and its financial situation has been further aggravated by the global Corvid 19 pandemic.
However, the judges noted that Kotecha failed to comply with the conditional order for stay of execution that was made by this Court on 2nd September, 2019 and now seeks to have the same set aside, and or varied.
Kotecha urged the Court to review the order because they are unable to raise the security that was ordered due to the company’s dire financial position.
In the order sought to be reviewed, the Court had given Kotecha’s 30 days from the date of the order to deposit the required security, in default of which, the order of stay was to automatically lapse.
“This means that the order of stay lapsed more than one year ago. We have not been told what the situation on the ground is. The applicant has also not explained why it has taken them a year to make the application,” said the appellate court.
Former Kamukunji Officer Commanding Station (OCS) Chief Inspector Samir Abhuman Yunus before Milimani Magistrate court./S.A.N.
BY SAM ALFAN.
Two senior police officers accused of aiding a prisoner escape from custody three years ago have been freed by a Nairobi court.
Simir Yunus, who was the Officer Commanding Pangani police station (OCS) and Amos Odhiambo were accused of aiding Hussein Mumin Hassan to escape from custody.
Milimani Principal Magistrate Caroline Mugo acquitted the two saying the case was founded on hearsay.
“I therefore find that a prima facie case has not been established and I proceed to acquit both accused persons under section 210 of Criminal Procedure Code. Accused persons shall be set at liberty forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held,” ruled Magistrate Mugo.
The court found that the entire prosecution case was founded on an expose by NTV, noting that there very many shortcomings yet the prosecution expected the court to “overlook them and run with the contents of expose as if they were the gospel truth”.
Mugo added that the greatest concern was that even after watching the entire clip, there was no evidence to show that the person who was allegedly released in the expose was in fact Hussein Mumin.
The magistrate said the investigating officer stated that he did not have the details for Hussein Mumin and that he admitted that there was no facial recognition done to identify the man in the clip as Hussein Mumin.
“None of Hussein Mumin’s alleged relatives who are featured in the expose were called as prosecution witnesses. This therefore begs the question; how then can the court be sure the man allegedly released in the NTV expose was Hussein Mumin,” said Magistrate Mugo.
The court noted that Chief Inspector David Muasya who was the digital forensic expert could also not rule out the possibility of the video being AI generated.
On the other hand, she said the investigating Officer in his evidence admitted that he did not know the whereabouts of Hussein Mumin and if he was in Somalia or not.
“It should be noted that there was no witness called from the Somalia Embassy to confirm that Hussein Mumin was not taken back to Somalia as ordered by the court,” the court said.
During cross-examination, Yunus lawyer Kimani Wachira told the court PC Otieno Omondi confirmed that Odhiambo had signed in the cell register that Hussein Mumin was to be repatriated to Somalia.
The officer admitted that he may have erred when he made the OB entry indicating Hussein Mumin had been released without complaint instead of being repatriated.
Wachira pressed hard on the witness who admitted in court his client had not played the clip marked as IPOA 871 but rather the clip from you tube by NTV.
Further pressed by lawyer Wachira, the witness also confirmed he was not employed by NTV and he had no control over the NTV page.
He also confirmed the source of the video was NTV and the clip was made up of several clips put together so it was an edited clip.
While being cross-examined by lawyer Wachira, the witness further confirmed he did not get the original clip from NTV and he did not access the gadgets which made the clip.
Suleiman Wanjau Bilali and Robert Otiti Elwak before a Nairobi court./PHOTO BY S.A.N.
BY SAM ALFAN.
A Nairobi court has ordered a former Kenya boxer and a football coach to deposit cash bail of Sh20,000 each to secure their release, after rejecting an application by the police to detain them for 10 days.
Suleiman Wanjau Bilali, the former Kenyan boxer and Robert Otiti Elwak, were arrested over suspicion of planning Wednesday’s demonstrators with a view to storming State House.
But through their lawyer and Embakasi East MP Babu Owino, the suspects vehemently opposed the application to be detained.
The MP who was appearing in court for the first time after being sworn as advocate told the court that the two had done nothing wrong.
Babu further pointed out to the duty magistrate Dalpina Alego that the two suspects were arrested on 24th June 2025 but arraigned in court on 26th June which is against the 24 hours period stipulated by constitution.
He added that Elwak uses a Nokia button phone (Kabambe) which has no capacity to access internet. The MP told the court that the police should have done their investigations before proceeding to arrest the two sportsmen.
According to the DCI, they received intelligence information on the 20th June, 2025, on the timetable that was circulating on various social media platforms with inflammatory and inciting messages.
The posts were allegedly urging members of the public to attend a protest march whose aim was to unlawfully take over and occupy state house on the 25th day of June 2025.
DCI through affidavit sworn by Sergeant Samuel Itegi said publication was traced to an X account by the username @daguindd (Daguin Dd) before it went viral on various social media platforms.
The officer told court that the suspects are believed to be part of the suspected individuals who planned to infiltrate a peaceful demonstration organized by the young people of Kenya (Gen Z), to engage in unlawful acts of stealing from shops, assault innocent citizens and promote political ideologies that undermines the security and stability of the country.
“The suspects and others mobilized people with an intention to steal and breach the security at State House, a National Security Asset in breach of both the Public Order Act and the Protected Areas Act,” the investigator said.
Sergeant Itegi told Magistrate Alego that continuous publication of such material on the public social media pages has led to violent agitation by the general public, a matter that has had a negative security impact and is now threatening National stability.
The police said they needed time to subject the duo’s mobile phones to forensic analysis, obtain bank and M-pesa statements and record statements from key witnesses in the investigation.
But the court rejected the application and ordered the two to deposit the cash bail in court.
Businessman Nahashon Philip Aroko appearing before High court criminal division./PHOTO BY S.A.N.
BY PHEOBE WANJOHI.
The family of the late Kasipul Member of Parliament Charles Ong’ondo Were has questioned the motive to drop businessman Philip Aroko as a suspect and instead use him as a state witness.
MP Were was gunned down near City Mortuary roundabout on April 30, by assailants who had trailed him from Nairobi’s central business district. Aroko was among 11 suspects arrested over the MP’s killing and was in custody as police investigated the murder.
However, Director of Public Prosecution Renson Ingonga, later indicated that he was dropping the businessman as a suspect and would instead, use him as a witness.
he family expressed shock at the decision and now wants the DPP to direct Inspector General Douglas Kanja to order the police to investigate information given by the family, on a meeting held by three people including Aroko.
Through lawyer Apollo Mboya, the victim’s family is concerned that despite providing crucial information to assist with the investigations, decisions have been made that is aimed at through omission to exclude or shield individuals that may be involved in the crime.
“Our clients have specifically mentioned the following the closed door-planning meeting specifically involving suspects Ebel Ochieng alias Dave Calo and Allan Omondi Ogola, which Philip Nahashon Aroko also attended and meeting at Acacia Premier Hotel-Kisumu involving the deceased, a former Member of County Assembly of Nairobi County and others, in which the deceased was informed of a previous meeting convened by Philip Nahashon Aroko where a plan to assassinate the deceased was discussed,” state the letter by lawyer Mboya to the DPP.
The victim’s family said they were surprised and concerned that some of the main perpetrators to the heinous crime may escape the full force of the law and guise of State Witness.
“We therefore request that you exercise your constitutional powers and direct the police to investigate all the information and/or allegation of criminal conduct already provided to them by the family,” said the family.
The businessman-cum-politician was previously arrested and treated as a prime suspect in the high-profile case, was freed after a review of evidence by the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) cleared him of direct involvement.
Aroko surrendered to the police in May hours after his photo was posted on DCI Twitter handle requesting him to immediately present himself to the nearest police station.
“He is a person of interest in the ongoing investigation into the brutal murder of Hon. Charles Ong’ondo Were. Compliance with this request is mandatory,” according to DCI post on May 7 this year.
The Homa Bay businessman has previously denied any involvement in the murder of the MP. He was later arraigned at the JKIA Law Courts and freed on cash bail only to be re-arrested by the police.
Nairobi County Government embattled Housing Chief officer Lydia Mathia.
BY SAM ALFAN.
Nairobi County Assembly has been stopped from removing embattled Housing Chief officer Lydia Mathia from office.
High Court Judge Bahati Mwamuye temporarily stopped the county assembly from removing the official from office, pending the hearing and determination of the case.
“A conservatory order is hereby issued restraining the respondents, jointly and Severally, and the interested party(Nairobi County Public Service Board) and any other person or both of them from implementing , enforcing or acting in reliance of the resolution emanating from the said censor motion which was passed on June 24, 2025,” said Justice Mwamuye.
Through lawyer Moses Mabeya, Mathia accused the Members of the County Assembly (MCAs) of condemning her unheard.
The lawyer added that the MCAs violated her constitutional right to a fair hearing guaranteed by the constitution.
Mabeya said there was no prior notice, summons, or opportunity granted to her, to respond before the censure motion was tabled, debated, and adopted.
“That the petitioner was condemned unheard, in direct violation of the constitutional guarantee to a fair hearing under article 30. No prior Notice, summons, or opportunity to respond was awarded to her before the censor motion was tabled, debated and adopted,” Mabeya told the court.
He also told the court that, when such developments of the County Assembly and the County Government are not stopped on time, they would easily render her jobless. The Nairobi City County Assembly through its 3rd assembly 4th session tabled a motion to discuss her conduct.
“This blatant disregard of due process renders the entire motion unconstitutional and the adoption of the censure motion without affording the Mathia a hearing violates the principles of natural justice and fair administrative action under Articles 47 and 50 of the Constitution and further contravenes Section 4 of the Fair Administrative Action Act, 2015,” court heard.
He submitted that unless restrained, adoption and actions based on the said resolutions will further violate and entrench her rights and irreparably prejudice.
The lawyer said there was imminent risk of Mathia being restricted from accessing her offices to execute her lawful mandates that will amount to an indirect firing and prejudicial to the Public and citizens of the County of Nairobi whom she serves in her official capacity.
“The motion is void and illegal as there was no prayer made of such motion on the floor of the house to censure me; instead there were recommendations and resolution to investigate which in reality is an impeachment motion,” Mathia said in an affidavit filed in court.
The official was accused of gross misconduct, abuse of office, violation of human rights and defiance of court orders, in relation to recent evictions of tenants from county houses.
Oki General Trading limited director Honey Khatwani before a Nairobi court where he denied stealing from the company. /PHOTO BY S.A.N.
BY SAM ALFAN.
A director of Oki General Trading limited has been charged with stealing more than Sh350 million from the company.
Honey Khatwani appeared before Milimani Senior Principal Magistrate Dolpina Alego and denied the charges.
The prosecution told the court that stole USD 2,786,806.05 (approximately Kshs. 356,711,174.4), on the diverse dates between 1 January 2020 and 30th June 2024, at company situated on Baba Dogo within Nairobi County.
The court heard that the Indian national he stole the millions after the money came into his possession by virtue of his employment.
The court directed him to deposit bond of Sh10 million or alternative cash bail of Sh5 million, to secure his release, after spending a day in police custody.
Kelvin Mutuku Mutinga before court./PHOTO BY S.A.N.
BY REPORTER.
A student had been charged with stealing two calculators valued at Sh8,500 from fellow students.
Kelvin Mutuku Mutinga, a student at Railways Training Institute pleaded guilty to stealing two items, when he appeared before Milimani Senior Principal Magistrate Dolpina Alego.
The prosecution told the court Mutuku stole a calculator make V.P.A.M fx-82ms second edition valued at Sh.2500 the property of Janese Mogina.
The charge sheet stated that he stole the calculator on June 16, 2025 at the college.
On the same day, Mutuku stole another calculator belonging to Willie Osoro Mutungi. The calculator was valued at Sh6,000.
He admitted the charges and the case was pushed to a new date when the prosecution will present to court, facts of the case and for the magistrate to mete her punishment on the student.
Madison Insurance company care manager Anthony Njuguna Kimani before Milimani Chief Magistrate court./PHOTO BY S.A.N.
BY NT CORRESPONDENT.
A top manager with Madison Insurance company ltd has been charged with conspiracy to defraud insurer of millions of shillings.
Anthony Njuguna Kimani, a care manager at the insurer, appeared before Milimani Senior Principal Magistrate Dolpina Alego and denied insurance fraud charges.
It is alleged that Njuguna fraudulently registered a dead man in Nakuru county Assembly for medical scheme. The charge stated that he committed the offence on diverse dates between 1 January and 30 May 2017 at Madison Insurance Kenya Limited head office at Upper hill in Nairobi County.
It is further alleged that he committed the offence jointly with another before court, being a Care Manager at the said insurance company.
The charge sheet also said Njuguna willfully and unlawfully committed himself in the preparation, presentation and fraudulent registration of Joseph Nganga Kariuki (deceased) to Nakuru County Assembly Medical Scheme as a beneficiary member.
It is alleged that he used falsified Employment Number CAS/CAS/632836/00 purporting that the dead man was a county assembly staff.
He was released on a bond of Sh.3 million or alternative cash bail of Sh.1 million, after denying the charges.
Any decision delivered by Small Claims Court outside 60 days from date of filing the case is a nullity, a judge has ruled.
High Court judge William Musyoka ruled that all cases filed before the courts must be finalised within the 60 days period.
As the sixty-day period had lapsed, as at the date judgement was delivered, the trial court no longer had jurisdiction, and it should not have returned any verdict. Consequently, I will allow the appeal herein,” ruled the judge.
The decision now stamps that small claims court have no jurisdiction to hear and determine dispute after lapse of 60 days.
Small Claims Court handles cases valued at less that Sh1 million and it was introduced as part of plans to reduce the case backlog, which has bogged down the Judiciary over the years.
The courts are meant to hear simple cases like sale and supply contracts, property damage and loss and claims from personal injury. The Act, which was passed in 2016 states that the matter should be finalised within 60 days of filing.
The hearings are conducted on day to day basis. The judge decision is after Daniel Makanda appealed decision of the small claims court that awarded motorcycle rider Eugene Osita general damages of Sh.800,000, special damages at Sh.3,550,000 and further medical expenses at Sh.80,000.
The judge allowed the appeal by Makanda and set aside the decision for handling the accident dispute beyond 60 days.
“As the sixty-day period had lapsed, as at the date judgement was delivered, the trial court no longer had jurisdiction, and it should not have returned any verdict. Consequently, I will allow the appeal herein. The judgement, of 21st February 2023, is hereby set aside, and substituted with an order dismissing the suit before the trial court,” ruled the judge while setting aside small claims court decision.
The judge added that the claim was filed on 7th November 2022 and the judgement was delivered on 21st February 2023.
“That was a total of one hundred and seven days after the filing of the claim. Judgement should have been delivered by 6th January 2023. The judgement delivered on 21st February 2023 was, therefore, a nullity,” ruled the judge.
The judge added that the Small Claims Court Act and the Rules do not provide for extension of that sixty-day period, and the trial court had not even purported to extend it.
“Let me say the last thing on this, with respect to that timeline being strict. Section 34(3) outlaws or limits grant of adjournments, save for “exceptional and unforeseen circumstances.” Section 34(4) outlines what these “exceptional and unforeseen circumstances” would be. The objective, of outlawing or limiting adjournments, is so that the court is able to hear and determine the matter within the strict timeline of sixty days. If the sixty-day timeline was not strict, Parliament would not have, no doubt, gone into all that trouble,” judge Musyoka said.
The dispute arose out of a road traffic accident. Both parties were motorists along Gitanga Road, Nairobi, with Makanda driving a motor vehicle registration mark and number KCC 2J, while the Osita was riding a motorcycle registration mark and number KMFD 6Z. Osita claimed that Makanda negligently handled his vehicle, causing the vehicle to collide with the motorcycle, at the Muthangari Gardens junction. Osita suffered bodily injuries, and exposed him to loss.
He sought general and special damages but Makanda resisted the claim.
Makanda conceded owning the motor vehicle, and the fact of the accident, but denied being negligent. The motorist attributed negligence on the rider.
The High Court has dismissed a petition seeking to suspend Metropol Corporation Limited’s operations as a Credit Reference Bureau (CRB), despite allegations of governance failures and regulatory non-compliance.
The Commission for Human Rights and Justice had filed the case, accusing the Central Bank of Kenya (CBK) of failing to act decisively on Metropol’s alleged misconduct, including allowing its Group Managing Director to earn over Sh100 million without formal appointment.
The lobby group had also applied for the court to compel CBK to forthwith withdraw and cancel with immediate effect the Credit Reference Bureau license issued to Metropol CRB and all its affiliates in accordance with Regulation 11 of the Banking (Credit Reference Bureau) Regulations 2020 for contravention of Regulations 15(2), 16(2), 18, 22, 24, 25, 26, 29, 32, 33, 42, 43, 44, 45 and 62 of the said Banking (Credit Reference Bureau) Regulations 2020;
In the petition, the commission urged the court to declare Samuel Umukoko is not an individual fit and proper to hold any public office for his open willful and deliberate mismanagement of public finances and misrepresentation of facts to the public.
“A declaration that Metropol Corporation ltd and Metropol CRB are in breach of the mandatory provisions as laid out in Regulations 43, 44 and 45 of the Banking (Credit Reference Bureau) Regulations 2020,” the commission urged the court.
Further , the commission urged the court to declare that Metropol CRB has been in continuous contravention of Regulation 15(2) and 72 of the Banking (Credit Reference Bureau) Regulations 2020 and consequently be subjected to fines computed in accordance with Regulation 15(3) and 72 of the said Banking (Credit Reference Bureau) Regulations 2020.
“It is imperative that this Court stamps its authority and halt their operations while the parties canvass the issues raised in the instant Petition herein. No party will be prejudiced,” the organization argued, citing Metropol’s failure to comply with CBK directives and the risk posed to public and financial institutions.
According to court documents, a July 2022 inspection by CBK’s Supervision Department uncovered serious breaches of the Credit Reference Bureau Regulations, 2020, particularly around corporate governance, data integrity, and database access.
One key violation was that Metropol CRB operated with only four directors, contrary to Regulation 43(1), which requires a minimum of five. CBK ordered corrective action within 15 days, including convening an emergency board meeting and imposed a Sh2 million penalty for non-compliance.
Despite this, Metropol’s board met only six months later, in December 2022. The company continued to violate governance rules, including failure to meet quorum, irregular board meetings, and a lack of institutional independence.
Further revelations showed the purported Group Managing Director received Sh29 million in salary without official appointment and withdrew an additional Sh828 million from company accounts without explanation. By July 2022, Metropol’s liabilities stood at Sh487.9 million, against assets of just Sh31.2 million.
The second major concern involved data handling. Metropol CRB allegedly onboarded unauthorized agents across Kenya who managed confidential data, raising serious questions about data integrity and privacy. These agents were also reportedly paid large sums.
According to the lobby group, Metropol CRB was found to have information technology lapses in that key applications and databases revealed lapses in access control and unable to host all critical applications and databases of the bureau.
Metropol CRB was further reported to have in its employ unauthorized and unregistered agents operating under its license with the regulator, the 3rd Respondent tabling evidence of the said agents receiving enormous sums of money as commissions in addition to handling and processing volumes of confidential data which they ought not to be in possession of; such an enormous indictment on the part of the 1 and 2nd Respondents.
Consequently, the said Bank Supervision department issued the company with a fifteen (15) day ultimatum to provide the Central Bank of Kenya with a report indicating corrective action taken.
“It is worth noting that the board of directors of Metropol Corporation ltd and Metropol CRB, even after receiving the strict timelines and threat of further sanctions from the CBK in the report under review herein only managed to convene a meeting on the 31 day of December 2022; six (6) months later in the backdrop of a fifteen (15) day ultimatum,” the lobby group stated in the court documents.
According to the World Bank’s report on Risk Premium on Lending worldwide, Kenya’s risk premium, which reflects the overall country’s confidence on its lending sector, declined to 5.1% in 2021 from 5.5% recorded in 2019, an
CBK likewise, through its Bank Supervision department decided to show no teeth and leisurely laid back with the report under review herein together with its recommendations and threats of further sanctions therein safely filed away and labelled Confidential.
According to supporting affidavit sworn by Commission for Human Rights and Justice Executive director Julius Ogogoh, the second issue of concern relates to the receiving, processing, storage and dissemination of data, the core business Metropol CRB was licensed to carry out wherein Metropol CRB was found to have information technology lapses in that key applications and databases revealed lapses in access control and unable to host all critical applications and databases of the bureau.
In his affidavit Ogogoh further told the court Metropol CRB was found to have onboarded numerous unauthorized and unlicensed agents and agencies across the country who were tasked with the task of handling volumes of confidential data which brought to question the integrity and safety of the said data; the said agents were receiving large sums of money in return.
According to the Targeted Report, Metropol CRB was found to have contracted one hundred and ninety-nine (199) agents who were unauthorized since no approval from the CBK was ever sought in express violation of the Bank (Credit Reference Bureau) Regulations 2020 exposing their customers’ personal details to be misused or mishandled.
Despite these findings, Justice Lawrence Mugambi found insufficient grounds to suspend Metropol’s operations, and dismissed the case.
